ASLEF - LNER drivers to strike every Sat & Sun for 3 months from 31 Aug - Now called off

[12LDA28C]

Ideal, no. But sounds like one of those situations you just have to deal with if and when it happens. There must be more than one DM in that geographical area that can assist. Same applies if the on-call DM is dealing with an on-call incident and then another incident happens somewhere else.

Indeed, but at least in that situation they're actually doing their own job, not filling in for a shortage of drivers. Not much use if the other DM 'in that geographical area' has had a beer or two if it's an evening or weekend, as they're quite entitled to do if they're off duty.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 Aug 2024 ==

Maybe I am missing the number of driver managers that there are. But then if there is only the one at York then presumably this whole strike is pointless as it is all about one driver manager working one train.

IF there are multiple driver managers then there would presumably be one within a reasonable distance and as near, or reasonably similarly near, to any incident as the office?

So the potential that an incident happens further from the train being driven by the driver manager seems than the office still makes it sound like an expensive luxury not to run the train.

Again, I am an outsider and may be missing something obvious.

Ok so going with your scenario. There is indeed more than one Driver Manager but let's imagine it's a Saturday and all available DMs are out driving trains. There is one who is closer to the fatality incident - do they abandon their train somewhere on the main line and go to assist at the incident?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 Aug 2024 ==

Then you call the next level up of on-call.
The reality of on-call is that for Managers, the day job does have to continue, so they still may be out and about assessing, attending meetings etc. It's impossible to write off an entire on-call period and stay rooted to the depot, not doing any other work just in case.

However, and this I think is the key point, there is a balance to be struck. I'd argue that carrying out additional safety critical tasks, over and above the day job, whilst on-call, does seem like an issue, both in terms of on-call resilience and the fatigue levels of the colleague involved.

It's pretty easy to cut short an assessment or a meeting. Driving a passenger train with hundreds of people on board - not so much.

We are talking about DMs driving trains, potentially covering a whole turn of 8,9 hours or more. Do that regularly and the day job will soon fall by the wayside.

 

[Topological]

Indeed, but at least in that situation they're actually doing their own job, not filling in for a shortage of drivers. Not much use if the other DM 'in that geographical area' has had a beer or two if it's an evening or weekend, as they're quite entitled to do if they're off duty.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 Aug 2024 ==



Ok so going with your scenario. There is indeed more than one Driver Manager but let's imagine it's a Saturday and all available DMs are out driving trains. There is one who is closer to the fatality incident - do they abandon their train somewhere on the main line and go to assist at the incident?

Terminate the train at the first place that it is safe to do so.

However, given the scenario involved a fatality it would probably mean that trains were not moving in one direction anyway (the line being closed) so a driver manager driving a train towards the incident may be best placed to go.

There have been plenty of threads recently about detraining passengers during disruption.

It would all be better if some drivers just took the money and drove on the rest days instead of the driver managers, but then maybe that is too obvious. The driver managers helping the public have a service seems to be a better solution than not having the train though.

 

[CC 72100]

It's pretty easy to cut short an assessment or a meeting. Driving a passenger train with hundreds of people on board - not so much.

We are talking about DMs driving trains, potentially covering a whole turn of 8,9 hours or more. Do that regularly and the day job will soon fall by the wayside

You can; but you can still be a far way away from the incident. I agree that you can pause, walk away and start dealing with the on-call incident far easier if that's what you're doing at the time, but there is still plenty of cause for a delayed response. Some TOCs have big on-call areas covering several miles, you can easily still be within the on-call area but at the 'wrong' end of it in relation to the incident.

I agree with your general point that DMs shouldn't be driving productive trains whilst on-call, however there are plenty of other less contentious/'day job' tasks which would also delay an on-call response in a fully legitimate manner.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

During Covid, when the public was literally told not to travel, many Operators reduced services to around 20% of the normal provision. How many drivers lost their jobs and how many members did ASLEF lose during this time?

None because the government borrowed eye watering sums of money during COVID to keep things going and people employed . If you think that level of support can go on forever - well enjoy that feeling.

 

[12LDA28C]

None because the government borrowed eye watering sums of money during COVID to keep things going and people employed trains running for essential workers.

There. Fixed that for you.

 

[Topological]

There. Fixed that for you.

And a further fix which emphasises the validity of the point that Covid was different and ASLEF would lose members in the event of a planned reduction in service in normal times.

None because the government borrowed eye watering sums of money during COVID to keep things going and people employed trains running for essential workers on a much reduced timetable.

 

[800001]

Ideal, no. But sounds like one of those situations you just have to deal with if and when it happens. There must be more than one DM in that geographical area that can assist. Same applies if the on-call DM is dealing with an on-call incident and then another incident happens somewhere else.

what if they are all driving trains?

 

[12LDA28C]

And a further fix which emphasises the validity of the point that Covid was different and ASLEF would lose members in the event of a planned reduction in service in normal times.

I don't actually believe this to be the case. Since most TOCs employ fewer drivers than they need to operate the full service, a planned reduction in service would simply mean that the provision of traincrew better matched the number of trains operated, with no overall reduction in driver numbers required. There may be a pause in recruitment but that just means ASLEF would gain fewer new members, not lose current members.

 

[LowLevel]

I would like to politely say that having had many years working for a Stagecoach TOC previously relations were generally cordial - but behind the scenes the actual way things were manoeuvred to try and negate, ignore or change T&Cs was extremely unpleasant and caused a lot of problems. As an individual I always felt well regarded, well treated and generally enjoyed my work. For a period of over 10 years though my grade was subject to a succession of dirty tricks which were only finally resolved by a change of owning group.

Given it is a Stagecoach management team of that era in charge of LNER I wouldn't be surprised at that kind of approach.

 

[Topological]

I don't actually believe this to be the case. Since most TOCs employ fewer drivers than they need to operate the full service, a planned reduction in service would simply mean that the provision of traincrew better matched the number of trains operated, with no overall reduction in driver numbers required. There may be a pause in recruitment but that just means ASLEF would gain fewer new members, not lose current members.

Does it need spelling out? Some members die (assuming that all members maintain their memberships until death).

I thought it would not be necessary to say why there needs to be a constant replacement of members to maintain numbers.

This applies whether, or not, the TOCs move to maintain current ratios of staffing or allow the provision of traincrew to better match service numbers.

 

[12LDA28C]

Does it need spelling out? Some members die (assuming that all members maintain their memberships until death).

I thought it would not be necessary to say why there needs to be a constant replacement of members to maintain numbers.

This applies whether, or not, the TOCs move to maintain current ratios of staffing or allow the provision of traincrew to better match service numbers.

At the end of the day passengers won't desert the railway, so there will be no need for any planned reduction in services as a result of reduced patronage so this is a pointless discussion.

 

[DanNCL]

At the end of the day passengers won't desert the railway, so there will be no need for any planned reduction in services as a result of reduced patronage so this is a pointless discussion.

Passengers may well desert LNER if they continue to be more expensive, less comfortable and less reliable than flying.

 

[Bald Rick]

Some people on this board have no idea how terribly, terribly badly this news is landing with people outside the rail industry...

And some people here have no idea how badly this has landed with LNER drivers…

This certainly also reinforces the decision to defer the Dec24 timetable enhancement that was clearly unachievable without worsening this situation further and probably now sees it kicked into the long grass for several years if ever.

This will have no impact on the new timetable next year.

Driver Managers are often required to undertake 'On Call' duties during which they may be required to attend a fatality or other serious incident suffered by one of their drivers. Imagine if a driver has a fatality at Welwyn and the On-Call DM is driving a train at York? It doesn't sound ideal to me - hardly an 'expensive luxury' as you claim.

AIUI (from the horses mouth), if a DM / DTM is on call and does a driving turn, then the on call responsibility passes to another person, going up the chain if necessary. It’s not an issue.


I’m really having to bite my tounge here as I know quite a bit about this.

However, what I can say is that I’ve gamed all the likely scenarios about how this might be brought to a conclusion (for my own curiosity, not because I’m involved), and I can see only one outcome that looks good for ASLEF, and that outcome does not look at all good for Government, the railway, or rail users. This is why I think this announcement today is so extraordinary, and a huge gamble by the ASLEF rep concerned.

 

[12LDA28C]

Passengers may well desert LNER if they continue to be more expensive, less comfortable and less reliable than flying.

Since LNER is one of the very few TOCs that are carrying more passengers than they were pre-Covid, even taking into account the past two years of industrial action, I suggest that's unlikely.

 

[dk1]

Passengers may well desert LNER if they continue to be more expensive, less comfortable and less reliable than flying.

No chance.

 

[DanNCL]

Since LNER is one of the very few TOCs that are carrying more passengers than they were pre-Covid, even taking into account the past two years of industrial action, I suggest that's unlikely.

No chance.

I hope you’re right. I have my doubts.

 

[dk1]

I hope you’re right. I have my doubts.

I wouldn’t worry. Rail has proven time and time again it can adapt and absorb any issues thrown at it and on lesser routes than a major artery such as this. I occasionally used to think like that but after almost 40 years of railway employment there really is no need to think that way.

 

[Tetchytyke]

And some people here have no idea how badly this has landed with LNER drivers

They voted for it!

 

[Bald Rick]

They voted for it!

When in another dispute about pay, and generally discontent. Which is not the situation that applied at close of play yesterday.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Many of tomorrows national papers have this dispute on the front page

https://www.tomorrowspapers.co.uk/

 

[dk1]

Many of tomorrows national papers have this dispute on the front page

https://www.tomorrowspapers.co.uk/

Typical Daily Mail. The way they twist the headline and initial storyline is quite amusing albeit farcical and easily swallowed by the layman.

It’s very noticeable how few newspapers many shops have on sale these days and those that do often have them on much smaller displays nearer the back rather than front of house. It seems quite unusual to see somebody actually reading one now too.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I do not trust the current LNER management because they removed the off peak fares London to Newcastle and Edinburgh and these have still not been reinstated so I want the current LNER management gone not just from LNER but from the railway industry so nobody else is tempted to remove any off peak fares and I want the off peak fares London to Newcastle and Edinburgh immediately reinstated.

The removal of off-peak fares by LNER is a trial of a new fares system, led by the GBR Transition Team - the people that are very likely to be in charge of the railway under the nationalisation proposals.
It's not just an LNER initiative.
Labour has made no decision on future fares policy.

 

[Bald Rick]

It seems quite unusual to see somebody actually reading one now too.

Especially in the cab

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Typical Daily Mail. The way they twist the headline and initial storyline is quite amusing albeit farcical and easily swallowed by the layman.

It’s very noticeable how few newspapers many shops have on sale these days and those that do often have them on much smaller displays nearer the back rather than front of house. It seems quite unusual to see somebody actually reading one now too.

Indeed but their headlines still end up being read by millions through digital media so still have ability to influence albeit much diminished

 

[BostonGeorge]

So, where did one dig this up from then?

Either the Telegraph or the Daily Mail. Two very union friendly newspapers... said nobody, ever.

Seriously, use your loaf for a moment here. Shall I go through the statute books to dig up loads of outdated UK laws that still exist but are never enforced?

For example, you can shake out your doormat, but only before 08:00!

 

[InkyScrolls]

If you don't know what people are arguing for, then ask them. Making up an obviously weak argument and dismissing it is the strawman fallacy.

Some of the outdated working practices in parts of the railway industry include:

• Refusal to use electronic means such as iPads to receive communications such as late notices or TSLs
• Staff members claiming an entitlement to restart the duration of a break if a manager speaks to the staff member during the break, even as little as saying hello
• Claiming of "walking time" of 10-15 minutes for distances that can be covered in less than two
• Strict demarcation of locations where work will be carried out where there is no rationale or benefit to the business
• Demanding money for use of scanning equipment to read e-tickets
• Refusing to use videoconferencing technology such as Zoom for meetings
• Refusing rest day working and then objecting to other competent employees working those rest days
• Claiming of paid time off every six months to check that the staff member's health hasn't been adversely impacted by the microwave in the break room

For the avoidance of doubt, I do not state that all or any of these practices are in place at LNER or any specific TOC, and I will not respond to seriatim refutation or rebuttal. I am citing them as examples of categories of behaviour that belong in the history books.

You'll be pleased to know, then, that those statements do not reflect reality.

 

[yorksrob]

However, what I can say is that I’ve gamed all the likely scenarios about how this might be brought to a conclusion (for my own curiosity, not because I’m involved), and I can see only one outcome that looks good for ASLEF, and that outcome does not look at all good for Government, the railway, or rail users. This is why I think this announcement today is so extraordinary, and a huge gamble by the ASLEF rep concerned.

Have those scenarios included removal of LNER management ?

 

[DanNCL]

I wouldn’t worry. Rail has proven time and time again it can adapt and absorb any issues thrown at it and on lesser routes than a major artery such as this. I occasionally used to think like that but after almost 40 years of railway employment there really is no need to think that way.

It needs to adapt and so far it’s not showing any signs of doing so. And these latest strikes, as much as I think they’re necessary, don’t help with public perception.

 

[newtownmgr]

So when everyone was celebrating that the strikes were over in the pay deal thread, in reality the unions will just find other issues to strike about?

Are we likely to see the unions go around the TOCs one by one finding disagreements to strike over?

Highly unlikely. This dispute with LNER has been ongoing for sometime alongside the national pay dispute.

 

[GusB]

Certain people who are posting in this thread need to realise that an employer does not own its employees and that we no longer live in Victorian times.

Time off is precious. It allows us to connect with family and friends; this is especially important when one starts work at silly'o'clock in the morning and, at the other end of the scale, finishes at stupid o'clock in the morning. These are things that we accept as shift workers; it goes with the territory.

However, there's nothing worse than when your long-planned weekend off is interrupted by a call from your boss asking you to cover a shift because of a staff shortage. I used to work a 4-on, 2-off pattern which meant that I only ever had Saturday and Sunday off once every seven weeks and it was totally frustrating to be phoned at 6am on that Saturday to be asked to come into work.

Sometimes you have to say "no"; it's not because you're unwilling to help the business or your colleagues, but simply because your own life outside of work comes first. As far as I'm concerned, if you fulfil your contractual obligations, your employer has no cause for complaint, especially if they fail to recruit sufficient staff to meet the needs of the business.

I'd be interested to know how many of the critics in this thread work nine-to-five and wouldn't ever consider working beyond their contracted hours without overtime payments.